[Grimburger]

I see this argument a lot, yet it falls apart upon closer inspection, I'm talking a few dollars a month to put your best foot forward at jobs that suit you rather than spray at basically every single open position and take whatever you can get.

Try to see this from the other side of the equation.

[rewmie]

> I see this argument a lot, yet it falls apart upon closer inspection

But does it, though? I don't think so.

> I'm talking a few dollars a month to put your best foot forward (...)

No, it really is not, and your portrayal really feels like a fraudulent way to frame the service.

No job applicant becomes better suited for a position if they apply through service A or B. Moreover, the only thing that this sort of service enables is throwing your hat in the race, and it's up to the candidate to successfully pass all subsequent tears. This sort of service does absolutely nothing to help you with those stages of the process, which are the ones that matter.

> Try to see this from the other side of the equation.

This is one of the many mistakes you're making. For the job seeker, there is only one side: the job seeker's side. There a already N services out there that allows them to apply for a job. None of them charges them a cent. Some companies even go through the trouble of posting the same job ad in multiple services. Some companies even hire multiple recruiters to find them the job applicant they are looking for. A job applicant can already apply through N services for free. Why would a job applicant suddenly feel the need to pay for the N+1?

It's stupid to confuse "have money" with willingness to pay, and mentioning vacuous statements like "sides of the equation" changes nothing.

[Grimburger]

> your portrayal really feels like a fraudulent way to frame

This an an incredibly offensive thing to say, there's definitely a fraud here and it is not me, you should probably try harder next time with your sigint thing :) Good luck with it mate, please don't ever again.

[rewmie]

> This an an incredibly offensive thing to say (...)

I'm pointing out a fundamental trait of a system: if a service charges users for each job application, regardless of their nature, then there's a perverse incentive for service operators to maximize the number of job ads a user applies to.

This includes but is not limited to creating fake job adverts.

Do you disagree?

[Grimburger]

> then there's a perverse incentive for service operators to maximize the number of job ads a user applies to.

Is that not an incentive for the service operators to find more employers? No one is forcing you to apply for a job hopefully.

When the cost for applying is zero all you get is:

- puffed up resumes

- laughable experience in the stack that doesn't last a few minutes upon (time consuming) inspection

- bad cultural fit

- fake human beings who aren't even real and are actually just devshops in third world pretending to be Europeans with fake personas and everything

- the list goes on...

These things are expensive on the other end, yet it costs a person exactly $0.00 to send that resume, it's the bullshit asymmetry principle at work, there's so much time and effort required to refute job applicants that you basically have to give up.

Again I'm asking you to go post a remote job and see for yourself. Please, try to see this from the other side, it might even benefit you as a jobseeker to do so :|